Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Conversion and Management: X

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/energy-conversion-and-management-x

Flat-plate solar collector thermal performance assessment via energy,

exergy and irreversibility analysis
Yemeli Wenceslas Koholé a, *, Fodoup Cyrille Vincelas Fohagui a, b, Ghislain Tchuen a
a
Department of Energetic, Environment and Thermal Engineering, IUT-FV Bandjoun, UR-ISIE, University of Dschang, P.O Box 134, Bandjoun, Cameroon
b
Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, College of Technology, The University of Bamenda, P.O. Box 39, Bambili, Cameroon

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This paper presents a detail exergy analysis of a flat-plate solar collector based on irreversibility rates. The
Absorber plate governing equations of the flat-plate collector are obtained by writing energy and exergy conservation equations
Exergy for glass cover, absorber plate and working fluid. The computed results of this study are in concordance with
Flat-plate collector
previous studies experimental data. Our findings reveal that 84.97% of total collector irreversibility are linked to
Irreversibility
Simulation
the absorber plate. Increasing the flow rate to 0.0056 kg/s decreases the irreversibility rate in the absorber plate
to a minimum of 579.20 W and increases the irreversibility rate in the working fluid to it maximum of 158.83 W.
The maximum exergy efficiency was 33.21% for a flow rate of 0.0056 kg/s and inlet fluid temperature of 30 ◦ C.
An increase in inlet fluid temperature from 20 to 65 ◦ C decreases the absorber plate irreversibility by 129.13 W,
meanwhile the working fluid and glass cover irreversibility increase by 30.37 W and 99.39 W, respectively. An
increase in number of absorber tube from one to sixteen increases the energy and exergy efficiencies respectively
by 34.61% and 92.94%. Meanwhile the absorber plate irreversibility rate increases by 97.49% and the irre­
versibility rates of the working fluid and glass cover reduce by 72.06% and 89.01%, respectively.

Introduction
Renewable technologies convert phenomena that occur naturally in
nature into useful forms of energy. Renewable sources like solar radia­
tion, tides, hydro, biomass and wind are been used by these technologies
for energy generation. These sources are not completely accessible due
to their intermittent nature and they have huge energy potential and
clear-cut regional changeability. These features lead to strenuous, but
resolvable, economic and technological constraints. Nowadays, great
effort has been made to improve the rate of collection and conversion
efficiencies of renewable energy devices by increasing their reliability
and applicability; and by reducing their initial and maintenance costs.
Liquid solar collectors are particular type of renewable energy tech­
nologies that harness solar radiation for hot water production. The
productivity of solar thermal collectors is largely influence by internal
irreversibility that occur within the collector. Minimizing the useful
energy wasted in solar collectors would provide the most efficient uti­
lization of the available energy. Worldwide research and development
on flat-plate solar collectors has been carried out during several decades.
For instance, Hashim et al. [1] have investigated experimentally a water
solar collector functioning with a working fluid flowing at two different
rates. They realized that, 5.3 L/min was the flow rate for which the
water collector achieved it highest efficiency and effectiveness. Nima
and Ali [2] investigated the influence of metal foam inserted in the tubes
of a flat-plate solar collector and found that, the insertion of metal foam
in the collector reduces its absorber plate mean temperature and
consequently enhances the convection coefficient to almost twice it
value. Koholé and Tchuen [3] optimized, designed, constructed and
experimented a flat-plate collector in two cities of Cameroon. They
showed that, the efficiency of the heater was nearly average for the
tested period and found a good concordance between the computational
results and experimentally obtained data. Wenceslas and Ghislain [4]
assessed exergy optimization of a flat-plate solar collector based on
design specifications. Using optimized parameters, they constructed a
local solar collector and validated it experimentally and numerically.
Their findings revealed the applicability of the heater in Cameroon.
Zhang et al [5] investigated a flat-plate solar collector they modified
from a conventional collector. The modified collector was tested under
three working modes. They studied the flow rate effect on the perfor­
mance of the collector functioning in the air–water heating mode; and
found an insignificant increase of the heat removal factor when the flow
rate crosses 0.10 kg/s. Gunjo et al [6] constructed, tested and validated a
flat-plate solar collector made of bent tubes. Their findings show that,

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: koholeyemeliwenceslas@yahoo.fr (Y. Wenceslas Koholé).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2022.100247
Received 2 April 2022; Received in revised form 8 June 2022; Accepted 9 June 2022
Available online 11 June 2022
2590-1745/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

Nomenclature ρ Density,kg/m3
− 4
σ Stefan Boltzmann constant W/m2 .◦ C
cp Specific heat capacity,J/kg.◦ C τ Transmitivity
di Tube inner diameter,m
dT Temperature difference,◦ C Subscript
dt Time difference,s a Ambient
Ex Exergetic heat transfer rate W/m2 c Convection
G Solar radiation,W/m2 d Destruction
h Heat transfer coefficient,W/m2 .◦ C col Collector
I Irreversibility,W en Energetic
k Conductivity,W/m.◦ C ex Exergetic
la Separation between front glazing and absorber plate,m f fluid
m Mass,kg fi Inlet fluid
nt Number of absorber tube fo Outlet fluid
Ra Rayleigh number g Front glazing
S Surface area,m2 g− a Front glazing to ambient
T Temperature,◦ C g − sky Front glazing to sky
V Wind speed,m/s p Absorber plate
p− a Absorber plate to ambient
Greek letters p− f Absorber plate to working fluid
α Absorptivity p− g Absorber plate to Front glazing
β Inclination, ◦ r Radiation
δ Thickness,m s Sun
η Efficiency wf Working fluid
ε Emissivity

the highest efficiency obtained from the collector was 71% with the
maximum fluid outlet temperature being 60 ◦ C. They also show that, an
increase of the loss coefficient and solar radiation improve the exergetic
efficiency while an increase in ambient temperature reduces the exergy
efficiency. Wojcicki [7] have showed that the major problem in the
studying solar collectors which is the assumed initial temperatures of the
collector elements can be overcome by using the typical day concept that
help to combined all the equations that calculate the output data into a
single balance equation. They concluded that, this method would lead to
a gain in time and money; and difficulties reduction in the process of
designing flat-plate solar collectors. Zhang et al [8] discussed the pa­
rameters that affect the performance of a flat-plate solar collector based
on the resistance network. They found that, both the efficiency and the
gained energy are increase for tube diameter of 12 mm whereas
increasing plate thickness lead to an enhancement of both the thermal
efficiency and the mean gained energy. Moss et al [9] constructed and
tested two flat-plate solar collectors. They analyzed the theoretical
aspect of the vacuum flat-plate. Using a simulator during the testing
period they found that, when the collector is evacuated the efficiency
rises from 36% to 56%. Cerón et al [10] established a flat-plate solar
collector three-dimensional model which helps in the prediction of its
performance. They validated the efficiency obtained with the three-
dimensional model with experimental data. Their findings revealed
that, the construction and experimental cost is being reduced when the
proposed heat transfer model is being used. Babu and Ramanan [11]
fabricated two solar flat-plate collectors one with finned tubes and the
other one with unfinned tubes and tested the collectors in a solar water
heater. Comparing the constructed collectors, they concluded that the
finned tubes configuration records the highest efficiency with an in­
crease of almost 4.5%. Sandhu and Siddiqui [12] examined a flat-plate
solar collector and investigated experimentally the working fluid tem­
perature fields inside the absorber pipes. Their findings revealed that,
the lowest and highest fluid temperature are found respectively at the
lowest and upper end of the pipes. Carmona and Palacio [13] studied a
flat-plate solar collector prototype having a phase change material
incorporated between the absorber plate and insulator. Their findings
show that, the predicted temperatures of the heater components were
obtained with a maximum error of 4.62%. Wang et al [14] studied a flat-
plate solar collector incorporating a new heat collecting device. While
analysing the influence of the collector inclination angle, the separation
between the new heat collecting plate and cover and the water flow rate,
they found that 10◦ , 20 mm and 0.15 kg/s are respectively the optimal
values of the above parameters; and they obtained an energetic effi­
ciency of 85.1%. Koholé et al [15] discussed and determined the flat-
plate solar collector optimal parameters that enhance its performance
based on the exergy theory. Their findings reveal that, fifteen absorber
tubes, a water rate of 0.0087 kg/s and a fluid inlet temperature of 37 ◦ C
are parameters that helps the flat plate collector to function at its highest
efficiency.
Flat plate solar collectors’ thermal performance has been studied
intensively by many authors using the first and second laws of ther­
modynamic. However, a deep and comprehensive detailed exergy
investigation is required for both the heating system and each of its
components for an efficient determination of the location, magnitude
and causes of irreversibility. Despite the fact that most investigations
reported the exergy assessment of solar collector, the collector compo­
nents irreversibility rate has not been presented so far. To the best of our
knowledge, no study has been performed on solar collector to outline the
effect of the collector components irreversibility rate on its thermal
performance and no study has been carried out on solar collector using
the exergy concept to assess the effect of some operational and
constructional parameters on the flat plate solar collector components
irreversibility rates.
Therefore, in the present study,
• an inclusive exergetic conservation equation was derived for the
heating system components and the exergetic efficiency was defined
with the help of various exergy components;
• the evaluation of a liquid flat-plate solar collector thermal perfor­
mance based on detailed exergetic analysis which include the eval­
uation of various collector component irreversibility rates has been
carried out;

2
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

• a parametric sensitivity analysis of various operational and are respectively the convection heat transfer coefficients from the
constructional parameters on the collector component irreversibility absorber plate to front glazing and from the front glazing to the envi­
rate and collector efficiencies is deeply investigated; ronment; G is the solar radiation and dt the time difference. Details
• the validation of the numerical simulation results with experimental concerning the evaluation of the aforementioned heat transfer co­
data is also part of the present research. efficients are described in [16,17,18] and their various expressions
presented in Eqs. (2–5):
Energy analysis ( )( )
Tp2 + Tg2 Tp + Tg
hr,p− g = σ (2)
The main aim of energy analysis is to derive a set of non-linear or­ 1 1
εp + εg − 1
dinary differentials equations that shall help to predict the flat-plate
( )
solar collector behaviour. The considered solar collector schematic ( )( ) Tg − Tsky
hr,g− = εg σ Tg2 + Tsky
2
Tg + Tsky (3)
view illustrating the heat exchange between the considered layers sky
Tg − Ta
(absorber plate, working fluid and glass cover) is displayed in Fig. 1. In
view of simplifying the thermal model, the following assumptions have hc,p− g la
Nu =
been made: ka
[ ]+ [
1708
• The contact thermal resistance between the absorber plate and the = 1 + 1.44 1 −
Racos(β)
1
absorber tubes is assumed to be negligible. ] [( ]+
)1
• The flow rates in all absorber tubes are identical. 1708[sin(1.8β) ]1.6 Racos(β) 3
− + − 1 (4)
• Temperature gradients around absorber tubes is assumed to be Racos(β) 5830
negligible.
• Water is the working fluid (however, other types of fluids can be hc,g− a = 5.7 + 3.8V (5)
utilized in the model).
• The pressure drop inside the absorber pipes is assumed to be In Eqs. (2–5), σ stands for Stefan–Boltzmann constant, εg the front
negligible. glazing emissivity, εp the absorber plate emissivity, la represents the
• The various thermo-physical properties of materials are independent distance between the collector absorber and the front glazing, ka is the
of temperature. air thermal conductivity, Ra the Rayleigh number, β is the flat plate
• Heat loss across the front and back of the collector are to the same collector inclination angle and V is the wind speed blowing over the
ambient temperature. collector and Tsky represents the sky temperature which is evaluated
following the correlation proposed by Swinbank [19]:
Writing the energy conservation equations for the considered layers
Tsky = 0.0552Ta2 (6)
one gets the following set of energy balance equations.

Absorber plate
Glass cover
Similarly, the absorber plate energy conservation equation is
If mg is the glass cover mass, cp− g its specific heat capacity and Sg its developed as:
surface area, then the energy conservation equation for the front glazing ( ) ( ) ki (
is written as: Gαp τg Sp = hr,p− g Sp Tp − Tg + hc,p− g Sp Tp − Tg + Sp Tp
δi
( ) ( ) ( )
) ( ) ( ) dTp
Gαg Sg + hr,p− g Sg Tp − Tg + hc,p− g Sg Tp − Tg − Ta + hc,p− f Sech,f Tp − Tf + mp cp− p
( ) dt
( ) ( ) ( ) dTg
= hc,g− a Sg Tg − Ta + hr,g− sky Sg Tg − Ta + mg cp− g (1)
dt where τg is the front glazing transmissivity; αp the absorber plate
In Eq. (1)Ta , Tg and Tp are ambient air, glass cover and absorber plate effective absorptivity; Sech,f the flow channels inner surface area; hc,p− f
temperatures respectively. αg is the glazing effective absorptivity. hr,p− g the working fluid flowing in channel convective coefficient; δi and ki are
and hr,g− sky are radiation heat transfer coefficients; while hc,p− g and hc,g− a the insulator thickness and thermal conductivity respectively; Sp the
absorber plate surface area; mp and cp− p are respectively the absorber
plate mass and specific heat capacity.

Working fluid

If the working fluid flow rate and density are respectively ṁf and ρf
then, its energy conservation equation is expressed as follows:
( ) π d2 dTf ṁf cp− ∂Tf
(8)
f
hc,p− f π di Tp − Tf = ρf cp− f i +
4 dt nt ∂y

where Tf is the working fluid temperature, nt the number of absorber

tube, di the absorber tube inner diameter and cp− f the working fluid
specific heat capacity.

Energy efficiency

The flat-plate solar collector energy efficiency is calculated using Eq.

Fig. 1. Solar collector schematic view illustrating the heat exchange between (9) which is the quotient of the working fluid heat gain and the total
the considered layers. incoming solar insolation reaching the collector [20,21].

3
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

( )
ṁf cp− Tfo − Tfi represents the quantity of exergy of the incoming insolation absorbed by
(9)
f
ηen = the front glazing and Ext,p− g the total exergy received by the front
Scol G
glazing associated to the heat exchange by convection and radiation
In Eq. (9), Tfo and Tfi represent the working fluid exist and inlet
between the absorber plate and glass cover.
temperatures and Scol the collector surface area.
Exsun the exergy of the incoming insolation on the transparent glass
cover which is expressed as [25–27]:
Exergy analysis [ ( )4 ( )]
1 Ta 4 Ta
Exsun = GSg 1 + − (13)
Exergy, like energy, can be conveyed to or removed from a compo­ 3 Ts 3 Ts
nent in the following ways: mass flow, work and heat. Exergy transfer is
perceived at the system frontier as exergy crosses the boundary, and it where Ts is the sun surface temperature.
shows the gained or lost exergy by the component throughout a process. Ext,p− g is the summation of the exergy associated with the heat
However, irreversibility escalation lead to entropy generation which transfers by convection and radiation between the front glazing and the
induces a reduction of the system exergy [22]. Therefore, to reduce the absorber plate expressed as:
irreversibility, the irreversibility effects on the heating system should be
identified. In order to calculate the irreversibility rates, exergy balance Ext,p− g = Exc,p− g + Exr,p− g (14)
for each component of the collector is written following the general form
of exergy conservation equation written as [23]: with Exr,p− g the exergy content linked to the heat transfer by radiation
between the absorber plate and the transparent glass cover is expressed
dEX ∑ ∑
as:
= EX − EX − I (10)
dt [
in out ( )4 ( )]
( ) 1 Ta 4 Ta
IrreversibilityI, is the summation of destructed and lost exergy in Exr,p− g = hr,p− g Sg Tp − Tg 1 + − (15)
3 Tp 3 Tp
control volume [23,24].
∑ ∑
I= EXloss + EXdest (11) and Exc,p− g the exergy content linked to the heat transfer by convection
between the front glazing and the absorber plate is written as:
The exergy content which completely leaves the considered volume ( )
( ) Ta
and vanished totally into the environment is called exergy loss. In the Exc,p− g = hc,p− g Sg Tp − Tg 1 − (16)
considered collector, exergy is being lost from the absorber plate to the Tp
ambient and from the front glazing to the surroundings. On the other Ext,g− a the total exergy loss from the front glazing to the surroundings
hand, exergy destruction refers to the quantity of exergy annihilated by means of convective and radiative heat transfers is expressed as:
within the considered volume due to irreversibility. In addition, exergy
destruction occurs in all the considered components. Ext,g− a = Exc,g− a + Exr,g− sky (17)

with Exc,g− a the exergy content attached to the heat transfer by con­
Exergy assessment of the front glazing
vection from the front glazing to the surroundings is given by:
( )
Considering the exergy flow diagram of the front glazing presented ( ) Ta
Exc,g− a = hc,g− a Sg Tg − Ta 1 − (18)
in Fig. 2, the exergy conservation equation of the front glazing is written Tg
as:
and Exr,g− sky the rate of conveyed exergy linked to the heat transfer by
dExg
Ig = Ext,g− a + Exd,g = αg Exsun + Ext,p− g − (12) radiation from the front glazing to the surroundings is written as:
dt
[ ( )4 ( )]
( ) 1 Ta 4 Ta
where Ext,g− a is the total available energy loss from front glazing to the Exr,g− sky = hr,g− sky Sg Tp − Tsky 1 + − (19)
3 Tg 3 Tg
surroundings, Exd,g the exergy destruction in the glass cover, αg Exsun

Exergy assessment of the absorber plate

The expression of the exergy balance equation of the absorber plate is

derived with the help of the exergy flow diagram of the absorber plate
depicted in Fig. 3 and is written as:
dExp
Ip = Exlost,p− a + Exd,p = αp τg Exsun − Ext,p− g − Exc,p− f − (20)
dt

where Exlost,p− a is the exergy loss from the absorber plate to the envi­
ronment evaluated with the following expression:
( )( )
Exlost,p− a = kδii Sp Tp − Ta 1 − TTap (21) and Exc,p− f the exergy content
associated to the heat exchanged by convection between the collector
absorber and the working fluid is given by:
( )
( ) Ta
Exc,p− f = hc,p− f Sech Tp − Tf 1 − (22)
Tp

Exergy assessment of the working fluid

The exergetic conservation equation of the working fluid is expressed

Fig. 2. Front glazing exergy flow diagram. using the exergy flow diagram for the working fluid illustrated in Fig. 4

4
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

ronmental temperatures, Eqs. (1) - (8) are resolved for the unknownsTg ,
Tp and Tf which are respectively the front glazing, absorber plate and
working fluid temperatures. The iterations stop when the value of
convergence is less than 10-4. Eventually, various efficiencies and irre­
versibility are calculated for each time step in view to analyse the flat
plate solar collector daily performance.

Validation

Considering the experimental data obtained by Wenceslas and Ghi­

slain [4] for a flat-plate solar collector, the present simulated values of
the current work is validated. The experiments of Ref. [4] were per­
formed on a collector which was constructed and experimented at the
Fotso Victor University Institute of technology, Bandjoun. The other
collector design parameters are identical with that of Ref. [4], as pre­
sented in Table 1. The following average relative error Eq. (26), is used
to conduct a quantitative comparison of their experimental results and
the present computed results.
⃒ ⃒
Fig. 3. Exergy flow diagram for the absorber plate. 1∑ n ⃒ ⃒
⃒yj,sim − yj,exp ⃒
Er = ⃒ ⃒ × 100% (26)
n j=1 ⃒ yj,exp ⃒

The comparison between the measured data and the present

computed results is presented in Table 2. It can be observed that, as the
insolation changes, the numerical simulation results present the same
variation with the measured data. The average relative error ofTp ,Tfo ,Tg ,
ηen and ηex are respectively 2.14%, 4.29%, 3.76%, 6.35% and 2.59%.
Noticeably, there is a good concordance between the actual computed
values and the measured data of Wenceslas and Ghislain [4]. Therefore,
the present theoretical model and the numerical method are reasonable.
Fig. 4. Exergy flow diagram for the working fluid.
Results and discussion
is given by:
Exergy analysis assesses the effectiveness of a system relative to its
Iwf = Exd,wf = Exc,p− f − ΔExwf (23)
performance in reversible conditions. It is the ratio of the thermal effi­
where ΔExwf is the exergy accumulated in the working fluid which is ciency of an actual system compared to an idealized or reversible version
of the system. The Exergy efficiency of the collector shows that internal
evaluated using the following expression [28,29]:
[( ) ( ) ]/ irreversibility and losses are to be evaluated to enhance the collector
ΔExwf = ṁf cp− f Tfo − Tfi − Ta ln Tfo /Tfi Δt (24) performance. Higher exergetic efficiency implies that higher energy
quality has been utilized in the collector, which makes the flat plate solar
In Eq. (24), Tfo and Tfi represent the working fluid exist and inlet
collector more sustainable. Meanwhile low energy quality and poor
temperatures at time interval, Δt respectively.
sustainable outcome are the consequence of smaller values of exergy
efficiency which highlights internal irreversible reactions and energy
Exergy efficiency losses. Moreover, exergy analysis helps to identify energy deterioration
in the solar collector and gives a precise measure of the useful work that
The exergy efficiency of the flat-plate solar collector expressed at Eq.
(25) is the ratio of the useful gained exergy by the working fluid to the Table 1
total insolation intercepted by the collector [30]. Flat plate solar collector constructional parameters.
[ ( )] Parameters Values Dimensions
T
ṁf cp− f Tfo − Tfi − Ta ln Tfofi
ηex = [ (25) δg 0.004 m
( )4 ( )]
δp 0.001 m
GScol 1 + 13 TTas − 43 TTas
δi 0.05 m
cp− g 840 J/kg◦ C
cp− p 385 J/kg◦ C
Computational procedure and validation cp− f 4183 J/kg◦ C
ρg 2490 kg/m3
Computational procedure ρp 8954 kg/m3
ρf 996.7 kg/m3
The computational procedure employed in the resolution of the εg 0.89 –
0.05
above derive set of equations is illustrated as follows. The major thermo- εp –
τg 0.88 –
physical parameters such as thermal conductivity, emissivity, density, ki 0.026 W/m◦ C
transmissivity and specific heat capacity of the various collector kf 0.597 W/m◦ C
component, which are utilized to evaluate the various coefficients of la 0.05 m
heat transfer are input at the beginning of the computational program. nt 0.8 –
0.06
After reading the various climatic input data which include the solar αg –
αp 0.95 –
radiation, wind speed, working fluid inlet temperature, sky and envi­

5
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

Table 2
Validation of the numerical results against measured data of Ref. [4].
Time (h) G(W/ Ta (◦ C) Tp,exp [4] Tp,sim (◦ C) Tfo,exp [4] Tfo,sim (◦ C) Tg,exp [4] Tg,sim (◦ C) ηenexp [4] ηexexp (%) ηexexp [4] ηexsim (%)
m2) (◦ C) (◦ C) (◦ C) (%) (%)

06:00 41.37 22.35 24.28 23.34 22.78 22.01 22.58 21.50 05.00 04.21 0.80 0.78
06:30 85.17 23.00 28.08 27.14 26.61 26.20 23.45 22.86 08.50 07.58 01.91 01.40
07:00 275.31 24.45 37.76 35.82 34.29 31.88 25.77 24.79 20.00 17.11 04.12 03.81
07:30 351.02 24.90 40.67 38.73 37.20 34.79 26.59 24.91 24.63 21.77 04.90 04.29
08:00 500.94 26.15 46.69 43.95 43.22 41.81 28.60 27.61 33.88 30.88 06.87 05.97
08:30 570.42 26.90 49.67 47.73 46.20 43.79 29.72 27.93 38.80 35.60 07.91 07.29
09:00 725.63 28.33 56.01 54.07 52.54 50.12 31.97 30.98 48.71 45.91 10.44 09.94
09:30 774.11 29.17 58.39 57.45 54.92 51.51 33.07 32.90 53.60 50.60 11.42 10.95
10:00 875.28 30.65 63.05 60.11 59.58 57.17 35.10 34.32 61.91 59.91 14.01 13.10
10:30 915.71 31.10 64.76 62.82 61.29 59.87 35.77 33.79 63.98 60.98 14.97 13.87
11:00 975.18 31.75 67.29 65.35 63.82 60.41 36.75 34.97 66.91 64.91 17.14 16.73
11:30 985.29 31.88 67.73 65.38 64.26 62.47 36.94 34.85 67.85 65.85 17.91 16.87
12:00 999.21 32.00 68.32 67.38 64.85 62.44 37.14 35.86 68.57 66.57 18.60 17.19
12:30 1000.0 32.01 68.34 66.16 65.01 63.78 37.14 35.86 68.61 66.57 18.61 17.23
13:00 998.78 31.70 68.10 65.76 64.63 62.32 36.92 34.94 68.12 66.12 18.40 16.99
13:30 993.57 31.50 67.70 63.44 64.23 61.82 36.71 34.72 67.42 65.42 17.96 16.55
14:00 975.38 31.31 66.38 63.50 62.91 59.50 35.86 33.87 64.71 61.71 16.20 15.79
14:30 957.27 31.13 65.44 63.24 61.97 58.56 35.38 33.89 62.13 60.93 15.34 14.93
15:00 882.67 30.70 62.18 59.39 58.71 56.30 34.07 32.98 57.39 54.39 12.89 11.79
15:30 838.91 30.55 60.33 58.62 56.86 54.45 33.35 32.37 54.35 52.35 11.89 10.79
16:00 725.10 30.10 55.56 53.25 52.09 49.68 31.53 30.94 46.88 44.88 09.63 08.80
16:30 670.10 29.91 53.19 50.25 49.72 47.30 30.60 29.89 43.05 41.85 08.68 07.89
17:00 525.33 29.47 47.19 45.17 43.72 42.47 28.43 27.75 35.52 33.52 06.45 05.69
17:30 445.06 29.18 44.11 43.92 40.64 38.23 27.50 26.71 30.98 27.27 05.71 04.82
18:00 261.81 28.51 36.86 34.92 33.39 31.98 25.26 24.87 23.24 21.24 03.91 02.78
18:30 183.03 23.32 33.86 31.33 30.39 28.97 24.43 23.34 19.00 17.18 03.11 02.46
Er (%) – – 03.93 – 04.45 – 03.75 – 06.34 – 09.59 –

can be used from the collector.
Time rate of change of collector components irreversibility
Fig. 5 presents the evolution of the irreversibility rate of the working
fluid, absorber plate and the glass cover against time. It can be observed
that, the point at which the irreversibility rate is maximum is obtained at
the highest solar radiation. Therefore, daylight production of hot water
is highly affected by solar radiation. Considering Fig. 5, the irrevers­
ibility rate of the collector absorber is far greater than that of the front
glazing and that of the working fluid. The dissipated exergy from the
collector absorber to the environment and the temperature change be­
tween the sun and the collector absorber are the reason behind the large
discrepancy observed between the collector absorber irreversibility and
that of the two others chosen components. The average irreversibility
rate of the collector absorber, the working fluid and glass cover are
respectively 285.86 W, 36.73 W and 26.16 W whereas a total average
irreversibility of the flat-plate solar collector is 348.75 W. Due to the fact
that 81.97% of the total average irreversibility rate of the whole system
is linked to the collector absorber plate, we can conclude that, a proper
choice of the absorber plate will lead to the reduction of the irrevers­
ibility rate of the system and as a consequence shall has a reasonable
influence on the flat-plate solar collector performance.
Heat transfer exergy rate
Fig. 6 depicts the hourly variation of convective exergy rate Exc,p− f
between the collector absorber pipes and the working fluid; convective
exergy rate Exc,p− g and radiative exergy rate Exr,p− g between the col­
lector absorber and the front glazing; and the exergy rate Exlost,p− a
dissipated from the collector absorber to the surroundings. It is observed
that, the three considered modes of exergy rate that take place within
the absorber plate increase with an increase in insolation and attained
their highest values at 12 pm. However, the convective exergy rate
Exc,p− f is more pronounce compared to others. Indeed, the exergy rate
dissipated and particularly the radiation exergy rate between the

Fig. 6. Variations of collector absorber plate exergies rates with respect

Fig. 5. Irreversibility variations with respect to time. to time.

6
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

collector absorber and the front glazing could be neglected.

Parametric study

A parametric analysis of some operating parameters such as insola­

tion, ambient temperature, working fluid inlet temperature and mass
flow rate on different exergy rate, irreversibility rate, energy and exergy
efficiencies are carried out in this section. Employing the proposed
thermal model, and setting the solar radiation and the ambient tem­
perature at 1000 W/m2 and 30 ◦ C respectively, the influence of insulator
thickness, absorber tube length, the number of absorber tube and the
distance between the collector absorber and the front glazing on the
energy and exergy efficiencies; and irreversibility rate are also
investigated.

Effect of solar radiation

Figs. 7–9 illustrate the variations of the solar collector components
temperature against insolation (Fig. 7); the variations of the irrevers­ Fig. 8. Irreversibility evolutions against solar radiation.
ibility of the absorber plateIp , the working fluid Iwf and glass cover Ig
against insolation G(Fig. 8) and the variations of the energy and exergy
efficiencies with respect to solar radiation (Fig. 9). The thermal perfor­
mance of the solar collector is significantly sensitive to incident solar
radiation changes. Increasing the incoming insolation increases the
absorber plate, the collector outlet fluid and the glass cover tempera­
tures (Fig. 7). According to Fig. 8, as solar radiation increases, the col­
lector absorber irreversibility increases at a very high rate compared to
the front glazing and working fluid irreversibility. The high irrevers­
ibility values of the collector absorber are due to the temperature dif­
ference between the flat-plate solar collector and the sun. It is obvious
that high irreversibility rate is been produced by solar radiation which is
the exergy/energy input of the solar collector. Since the increasing rate
of the output energy is lower than the increasing rate of the input en­
ergy, increasing the incoming solar radiation from 100 to 1000 Wm− 2,
the energy efficiency of the collector will decrease slightly by about
3.68% (Fig. 9). As solar radiation increases, the exergy efficiency in­
creases at a high rate leading to an increase of the ratio of the output
exergy to the input exergy rates (Fig. 9). An increase in solar radiation Fig. 9. Variations of energy and exergy efficiencies against solar radiation.
increases the heat transfer exergy rate and consequently increases the
outlet fluid temperature (Fig. 7). Additionally, increasing the incoming collector.
insolation from 100 to 1000 Wm− 2 leads to a 20.11% increase in the
exergy efficiency; this resulted from the fact that the increase in radia­ Effect of mass flow rate
tion exergy rate is lower than the increase in the flow exergy rate. Fig. 10 displays the solar collector component temperatures changes
Furthermore, the energy and exergy efficiencies have contradictory versus the working fluid mass flow rate. It is observed from Fig. 10 that,
behaviours as the incident solar radiation is increasing. The exergy ef­ all the flat plate solar collector component temperatures decrease non­
ficiency of the solar collector records the lowest values for the discuss linearly when the mass flow rate increases.
parameter because of the irreversibility rates that take place within the

Fig. 7. Temperature evolutions against solar radiation. Fig. 10. Temperature changes versus mass flow rate.

7
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

The irreversibility variations with respect to the mass flow rate are
presented in Fig. 11. Fig. 11 shows that, increasing the flow rate to
0.0056 kg/s decreases the irreversibility rate in the absorber plate to a
lowest value of 579.20 W and increases the irreversibility rate in the
working fluid to it maximum value of 158.83 W. However, for mass flow
rate exceeding 0.0056 kg/s the irreversibility within the collector
absorber increases at a rapid pace while the irreversibility in the
working fluid decreases at a higher rate. In addition, as the flow rate
increases, the irreversibility within the glass cover decreases non­
linearly. This variation of the glass cover irreversibility rate reveals that
the irreversibility rate in the glass cover is inversely proportional to the
mass flow rate. This is explained by the fact that, increasing the flow rate
leads to a decrease in the glass cover average temperature (Fig. 10)
resulting in a decrease of the irreversibility rate within the glass cover.
The energy and exergy efficiencies variations versus the mass flow
rate are depicted in Fig. 12. According to this figure, the energy effi­
ciency increases with an increase in the working fluid flow rate. This is
due to the fact that, as the component temperatures decrease with
increasing mass flow rate, the overall heat loss coefficient decreases. Fig. 12. Energy and exergy efficiencies variations versus mass flow rate.
Also, an increase in the working fluid mass flow rate reduces the rate of
heat exchange between the absorber tube and the working fluid, thus,
reducing the working fluid temperature at the exist of the collector
(Fig. 10) which lead to a consequent reduction of heat losses. Moreover,
the output energy augmentation of the solar collector is greater than the
input energy augmentation. Therefore, the energy efficiency of the solar
collector increases with higher working fluid flow rate as a result of
decreasing collector component temperatures (Fig. 12). The evolution of
the exergy efficiency versus the working fluid mass flow rate in also
shown in Fig. 12. As shown in Fig. 12, the exergy efficiency reaches its
highest value of 33.21% as a result of increasing collector total irre­
versibility within the flow rate range of 0.001 to 0.0056 kg/s. For flow
rate beyond 0.0056 kg/s the exergy efficiency diminishes. Therefore, the
optimal flow rate which corresponds to the maximum exergy efficiency
reached by the collector is 0.0056 kg/s.
It is important to mention here that, the fluid outlet temperature is
relative with the mass flow rate. From Fig. 10, it is not significant if the
mass flow rate is higher than 0.01 because the outlet temperature of
fluid below 45 ◦ C cannot be utilized. However, if the outlet temperature
of the working fluid is higher, then the efficiency will be low. So, opti­
mized the parameters of flat-plate solar collector for application is
necessary. Fig. 13. Components temperature evolutions versus inlet fluid temperature.

Effect of inlet fluid temperature
Fig. 13 displays the influence of the working fluid inlet temperature
on the collector component temperatures. As presented in Fig. 13, with
increasing inlet fluid temperature, the collector absorber temperature,
the collector exists fluid temperature and the front glazing temperature
increases. By increasing the flat plate solar collector outlet fluid tem­
perature, the temperature change in the exchange of thermal energy
with the sun reduces. As a consequence, the fluid irreversibility rate
enhances by 21.73% for inlet fluid temperature varying from 20 to 65 ◦ C

Fig. 11. Irreversibility variations versus mass flow rate. Fig. 14. Irreversibility variations versus inlet fluid temperature.

8
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

(Fig. 14). Fig. 14 reveals that, increasing the temperature of the fluid at
the inlet of the collector from 20 to 65 ◦ C enhances the glass cover
irreversibility rate by 99.39 W and reduces the absorber plate irrevers­
ibility rate by 129.13 W. As observed in Fig. 13, the collector component
temperatures increase with an increasing inlet fluid temperature
resulting to an augmentation of the overall loss coefficient and a
reduction in the desired rate of the output energy. For this reason, the
energy efficiency will decrease (Fig. 15). As it can be observed in Fig. 15,
by increasing the working fluid temperature at the inlet of the collector
from 20 to 65 ◦ C, the exergy efficiency increases to it maximum value of
35.27% and then decreases. Increasing the working fluid temperature at
the inlet of the collector also increase the collector exist fluid tempera­
ture (Fig. 13). However, when the working fluid temperature at the
collector input increases, the decreasing rate of the work exergy will be
lower than the increasing flow exergy rate, as a result varying the inlet
fluid temperature in the range of 20 to 30 ◦ C shall enhanced the exergy
efficiency by 1.29%. Finally, the obtained optimal inlet fluid tempera­
ture, which correspond to the maximum exergy efficiency reached by
the collector is 30 ◦ C (Fig. 15). Fig. 16. Components temperature evolutions versus ambient temperature.

Effect of ambient temperature

The influence of the ambient temperature on the collector compo­
nent temperatures, the irreversibility and the performance of the col­
lector is presented in Figs. 16–18. Increasing the ambient temperature
tends to enhance the temperature of the collector absorber, the working
fluid temperature at the output of the collector and the glass cover
temperature (Fig. 16). Fig. 17 indicates that, for greater values of
ambient temperature there is a reasonable increase in the irreversibility
of the collector absorber meanwhile there is a decrease in the working
fluid and glass cover irreversibility. This is due to the fact that by
increasing the ambient temperature, the rate of heat absorption by the
absorber and the destruction exergy in the collector absorber plate in­
creases. This increase in the absorber plate exergy destruction rate
resulted to an increase in the absorber plate irreversibility rate. On the
other hand, the working fluid and glass cover exergy destruction rates
reduces with an increase in ambient temperature and as a consequence,
the irreversibility in the front glazing and working fluid reduces. As
ambient temperature changes from 4 to 50 ◦ C, the Carnot factor in the
thermal exergy rate alongside the desired thermal exergy rate reduces
and consequently, the exergy efficiency reduces by 41.41% (Fig. 18). On
the other hand, by increasing the ambient temperature, the outlet fluid
Fig. 17. Irreversibility evolutions versus ambient temperature.
temperature increases (Fig. 16) resulting to an increase in the net ther­
mal energy rate. As a result, the energy efficiency of the collector in­
creases by 47.75% (Fig. 18).

Fig. 18. Energy and exergy efficiencies evolutions versus ambient temperature.

Effect of insulation thickness

The thermal behaviour of the collector is significantly sensitive to the
insulation thickness variations. As shown in Fig. 19, the collector
Fig. 15. Energy and exergy efficiencies evolutions versus inlet fluid component temperatures have a growing tendency as regards to the
temperature. insulation thickness. By increasing the insulation thickness, the

9
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

Fig. 21. Energy and exergy efficiencies variations with respect to insu­
Fig. 19. Temperature changes with respect to insulation thickness. lation thickness.

efficiencies of the collector increase with increasing insulation thickness

for values of δi < 0.02 m. This is because the insulation thermal-
conductance resistance increases with the positive change of the insu­
lation thickness and as a result the heat lost from the collector is mini­
mized (Fig. 21). Thus, the insulator thickness has a great impact on the
efficiencies of the flat-plate solar collector and on the irreversibility
rates. For δi > 0.02 m, the influence of the insulator thickness on second
law variables is insignificant (Figs. 20 and 21). An increase in the
insulation thickness from 0.01 m to 0.05 m leads respectively to a
22.68% and a 31.12% increase in the energy and the exergy efficiencies.
Furthermore, increasing the thickness of the insulator from 0.05 m to
0.13 m, the absorber plate irreversibility rate decreased by 0.58%, the
working fluid irreversibility rate increased by 1.45% and the glass cover
irreversibility rate reduced by 1.33%. Meanwhile the energy and the
exergy efficiencies are increased by 3.44% and 4.52% respectively.

Effect of the absorber tube length

Figs. 22 and 23 show the effect of the absorber tube length on the
Fig. 20. Irreversibility variations with respect to insulation thickness.
collector components irreversibility (Fig. 22); and how the efficiencies
of the collector changes with the absorber tube length (Fig. 23). As can
exchange of thermal energy/exergy rate increases alongside the work be seen from these figures, the absorber plate irreversibility rate
exergy rate. In addition, the collector outlet fluid temperature increases (Fig. 22) with the energy and exergy efficiencies (Fig. 23) increases with
whereas the solar intensity exergy rate is lower than the increase in the the increase of the absorber tube length. The reason behind this is that,
fluid flow exergy rate. Consequently, increasing insulation thickness for longer absorber tube length, the time taken by the working fluid to
from 0.00 to 0.13 m, the exergy efficiency enhances by 750% (Fig. 21). exit from the collector output is longer; and as a consequence, the
However, with increasing insulation thickness from 0.005 to 0.13 m, the
energy efficiency of the collector will increase by 781.94% (Fig. 21).
This considerable increase in the energy efficiency is because as the
insulation thickness increases, the energy input rate increases at a very
low rate compared to energy output rate. Figs. 20 and 21 depict the
influence of δi on the collector absorber, front glazing and working fluid
irreversibility rates (Fig. 20); and illustrate the efficiencies variations
with increasing insulator thickness (Fig. 21). It should be noted that, as
the insulation thickness increases from 0.00 to 0.13 m, the exchange
energy/exergy rate and the working fluid exergy destruction rate in­
creases while the front glazing exergy destruction rate reduces. Addi­
tionally, the increase in the fluid flow exergy rate is greater than the
decrease in the rate of heat absorption by the glass cover. As a result, the
working fluid irreversibility rate increases and the glass cover irrevers­
ibility rate decreases (Fig. 20). These figures show that, for δi < 0.02 m
the working fluid irreversibility rate increases while the absorber plate
irreversibility rate decreases by 7.58% and there is a 55.76% decrease in
the glass cover irreversibility rate as the thickness of the insulator in­
creases up to 0.02 m (Fig. 20). On the other hand, it can be seen that the Fig. 22. Irreversibility evolutions versus the absorber tube length.

10
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

Fig. 23. Energy and exergy efficiencies evolutions versus the absorber
tube length.

working fluid will absorb more heat from the tube wall which will lead Fig. 24. Temperature changes with respect to the number of absorber tubes.
to higher mean temperature of the working fluid in tubes. Hence, the gap
between the working fluid temperature and the collector absorber
temperature is greater, which strengthens the rate of heat transfer. Thus,
the collector efficiencies are increased. On the other hand, it can be seen
that the change in absorber tube length produces no reasonable change
in the working fluid and glass cover irreversibility (Fig. 22). When the
length of the absorber tube varies from 0.8 m to 2.0 m the absorber plate
irreversibility rate increased by 14.30%, while the working fluid and the
glass cover irreversibility rate reduced by 47.75% and 54.66% respec­
tively. Meanwhile the energy and the exergy efficiencies has increased
by 3.62% and 2.89% respectively. The discrepancies between the per­
centage change of various irreversibility rate and efficiencies reveals
that the change of the length of the absorption tube from 0.8 m to 2.0 m
has a great influence on the irreversibility rate of the collector assembly
(Fig. 22), but has little influence on the collector efficiencies (Fig. 23).
Furthermore, when the length of the absorber tube is relatively
long(Lt > 2m), there is little change on the second law variables. When
the length of the absorber tube varies from 2.0 m to 2.8 m the absorber
plate irreversibility rate increased by 4.81%, while the working fluid
and the glass cover irreversibility rate have reduced by 25.19% and
Fig. 25. Irreversibility variations with respect to the number of absorber tubes.
2.15% respectively. Meanwhile the energy and the exergy efficiencies
has increased by 1.38% and 2.35% respectively.
When the length of the absorber tube varies from 0.8 m to 2.8 m, the
absorber plate irreversibility rate increased from 569.89 W to 682.73 W;
while the irreversibility rates of the working fluid and the glass cover
reduced from 144.70 W to 56.55 W and from 37.88 W to 13.20 W
respectively; and the energy efficiency increased from 50.93% to
56.38% and exergy efficiency increased from 29.70% to 34.06%.

Effect of the number absorber tube

Increasing the number of absorber tube enhances the heat exchange
surface between the absorber tubes and the fluid. These interactions lead
to a decrease in the collector component temperature as shown in
Fig. 24. Increasing the number of absorber tubes means decreasing the
fluid mass flow rate, which is an essential operational parameter.
Although the number of absorber tube increases from 1 to 16, the col­
lector outlet fluid temperature reduces by about 19.36 ◦ C, but the col­
lector heat losses reduce with the decrease in the heater component
temperature, resulting in a 34.61% increase in the energy efficiency
(Fig. 26). As it can be seen in Fig. 26, the exergy efficiency has a growing
tendency as regard to the varying number of absorber tube. An increase Fig. 26. Energy and exergy efficiencies variations with respect to the number
in the number of absorber tube leads to an enhancement of the heat of absorber tubes.
transfer exergy rate which resulted to an augmentation of the exergy
efficiency by 11.61%. Figs. 25 and 26 predict the effect of the number of
absorber tube on the collector absorber, working fluid and front glazing

11
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al. Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247

irreversibility rates (Fig. 25); and how the efficiencies of the collector
changes with the number of absorber tube (Fig. 26). As can be seen from
these figures, the absorber plate irreversibility rate (Fig. 25) with the
energy and exergy efficiencies (Fig. 26) increases with the increase of
the number of absorber tube. The reason behind this is that, an increase
in the number of tubes lead to an increase in the heat exchange surface
area and strengthen the rate of heat transfer. Consequently, the gained
useful energy by the working fluid in absorber tube receives the greater
portion of the total energy gained by the absorber plate, and as a result
the efficiencies of the flat-plate solar collector are increased. On the
other hand, it can be observed that, increasing the number of absorber
tube led to a significant decrease in the working fluid and glass cover
irreversibility (Fig. 25). When the number of absorber tube nt increases
from 1 to 16, the absorber plate irreversibility rate increased by 97.79%;
while the irreversibility rates of the working fluid and the glass cover
reduced by 72.06% and 89.01% respectively; and the energy and exergy
efficiencies are enhanced by 14.77% and 11.61% respectively. Thus,
increasing the number of absorber tube can ameliorate the performance
of the solar collector significantly. Fig. 28. Irreversibility variations with respect to the separation between the
When the number of absorber tube increases from 1 to 16, the collector absorber and the front glazing.
absorber plate irreversibility rate increased from 334.33 W to 660.28 W;
while the irreversibility rates of the working fluid and the glass cover
reduced from 272.90 W to 76.24 W and from 145.24 W to 15.95 W
respectively; and the energy and exergy efficiencies are increased from
42.67% to 57.44% and from 23.30% to 34.91% respectively.

Effect of the separation between the collector plate and the front glazing
Figs. 27–29 present the influence of the separation between the
collector absorber and front glazingla , on the collector component
temperature (Fig. 27); the variation of the irreversibility rate with
respect to the distance between the collector absorber and front glazing
(Fig. 28); and how the efficiencies of the collector changes with this
separation (Fig. 29). As shown in Figs. 27 and 28, a greater effect is
noticed at low separation between the collector absorber and the front
glazing (la < 0.04m) on the component temperatures and irreversibility
rates, while this effect is negligible for separation between the collector
absorber and the front glazing above 0.04 m. The collector absorber
temperature and the irreversibility rate in the absorber plate were found
to increase sharply when the separation between the collector absorber
and front glazing was increased from 0 to 0.04 m, then a slight increase
was observed on these values when the separation between the collector
Fig. 29. Energy and exergy efficiencies variations with respect to the separa­
absorber and the front glazing was increased from 0.04 to 0.14 m.
tion between the collector absorber and the front glazing.

Meanwhile the front glazing temperature and the irreversibility rate in

the glass cover were found to decreased sharply when the separation
between the collector absorber and front glazing was increased from 0 to
0.04 m, then a slight decrease was observed on these values when
further increasing the separation between the collector absorber plate
and the front glazing from 0.04 to 0.14 m. The increase in the absorber
plate irreversibility rate and the decrease in the front glazing irrevers­
ibility rate for the range of 0 to 0.04 m was respectively as follows: from
592.01 W to 595.95 W and from 38.16 W to 28.94 W. The effect of the
separation between the collector absorber and front glazing on the en­
ergy and exergy efficiencies of the flat plate solar collector was calcu­
lated in the range from 0 to 0.14 m (Fig. 29). The separation between the
collector absorber and the front glazing has great effect on both effi­
ciencies at absorber-glass cover distance below 0.04 m. As it can be
observed in this range (Fig. 29), the energy and exergy efficiencies
increased respectively from 43.92% to 54.20% and from 22.94% to
32.31%. For the separation between the collector absorber and the front
glazing above 0.04 m a slight increase was observed on the values of the
efficiencies.

Fig. 27. Temperature changes with respect to the separation between the
collector absorber and the front glazing.

12
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al.
Conclusion
In this study, a detail exergy analysis of a liquid flat-plate solar col­
lector based on irreversibility rates in the absorber plate, working fluid
and glass cover was successfully developed. While performing an energy
and exergy balance on each of the aforementioned component, corre­
lations between climatic parameters, exergy efficiency, energy effi­
ciency and irreversibility were derived. A numerical computation
program was developed to solve the resulted nonlinear system of
equations and analyse the influence of some parameters such as inso­
lation, fluid mass flow rate, inlet fluid temperature, ambient tempera­
ture, insulator thickness, absorber tube length, number of absorber tube
and the separation between the collector absorber and the front glazing
on the energy and exergy efficiencies; and irreversibility rates. Our
findings yield the following conclusion listed below:
• Irreversibility analysis shows that, 84.97% of the total flat-plate solar
collector irreversibility are linked to the absorber plate.
• The irreversibility produced in the absorber plate represent the
largest exergy destruction, up to 285.86 W for a 1000 W/m2 exergy
input; meanwhile the irreversibility rates in the working fluid and
glass cover can be neglected.
• The exergy rate between the collector absorber and the working fluid
is more pronounce while the dissipated exergy rate and particularly
the radiative exergy rate between the collector absorber plate and
the front glazing could be neglected.
• Increasing the incoming solar radiation from 100 to 1000 Wm− 2,
decreased the energy efficiency of the collector from 57% to 53.37%
while the exergy efficiency increased from 12.58% to 32.69%.
• Increasing the flow rate to 0.0056 kg/s decreases the irreversibility
rate in the absorber plate to a lowest value of 579.20 W and increases
the irreversibility rate in the working fluid to it maximum value of
158.83 W. The maximum exergy efficiency was 33.21% for a fluid
mass flow rate of 0.0056 kg/s.
• Increasing the working fluid temperature at the collector inlet from
20 to 65 ◦ C the absorber plate irreversibility rate was decreased by
129.13 W, while the working fluid and glass cover irreversibility
rates were increased by 30.37 W and 99.39 W, respectively. The
optimal inlet fluid temperature, which correspond to the maximum
exergy efficiency reached by the collector was 30 ◦ C.
• Increasing the ambient temperature from 4 to 50 ◦ C the exergy ef­
ficiency was reduced by 41.41% and the energy efficiency was
increased by 47.75%. For greater values of ambient temperature a
decrease in the working fluid and glass cover irreversibility was
noted while an increase in the irreversibility of the absorber plate
was observed.
• An increase in the insulation thickness from 0.01 m to 0.05 m leads
respectively to a 22.68% and a 31.12% increase in the energy and the
exergy efficiencies. Increasing the thickness of the insulator from
0.05 m to 0.13 m, the absorber plate irreversibility rate decreased by
0.58%, the working fluid irreversibility rate increased by 1.45% and
the glass cover irreversibility rate reduced by 1.33%. Meanwhile the
energy and the exergy efficiencies are increased by 3.44% and 4.52%
respectively.
• When the length of the absorber tube varies from 0.8 m to 2.8 m, the
absorber plate irreversibility rate increased from 569.89 W to
682.73 W; while the irreversibility rates of the working fluid and the
glass cover reduced from 144.70 W to 56.55 W and from 37.88 W to
13.20 W respectively; and the energy and exergy efficiencies are
increased from 50.93% to 56.38% and from 29.70% to 34.06%
respectively.
• While increasing the number of absorber tube, the energy and exergy
efficiencies increased respectively from 42.67% to 57.44% and from
23.30% to 34.91%; while the absorber plate irreversibility rate
increased from 334.33 W to 660.28 W; the irreversibility rates of the
13
Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247
working fluid and the glass cover reduced from 272.90 W to 76.24 W
and from 145.24 W to 15.95 W respectively.
• When increasing the separation between the collector absorber and
the front glazing from 0 to 0.04 m the absorber plate irreversibility
rate increased from 592.01 W to 595.95 W and the glass cover
irreversibility rate decreased from 38.16 W to 28.94 W; while the
energy and exergy efficiencies increased from 43.92% to 54.20% and
from 22.94% to 32.31%, respectively. Above 0.04 m, the effect of the
separation between the collector absorber and the front glazing is not
really significant.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Yemeli Wenceslas Koholé: Conceptualization, Methodology, Soft­
ware, Validation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Writing –
original draft, Writing – review & editing, Visualization. Fodoup Cyrille
Vincelas Fohagui: Validation, Visualization, Formal analysis, Re­
sources, Writing – review & editing. Ghislain Tchuen: Supervision,
Project administration.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] Hashim WM, Shomran AT, Jurmut HA, Gaaz TS, Kadhum AAH, Al-Amiery AA.
Case study on solar water heating for flat plate collector. Case Stud Therm Eng
2018;12:666–71.
[2] Nima MA, Ali AM. Effect of metal foam insertion on thermal performance of flat-
platewater solar collector under iraqi climate conditions. Arab J Sci Eng 2017;42:
4863–84.
[3] Koholé YW, Tchuen G. experimental and numerical investigation of a
thermosyphon solar water heater. Int J Ambient Energy 2018;41:384–94.
[4] Wenceslas KY, Ghislain T. Experimental validation of exergy optimization of a flat-
plate solar collector in a thermosyphon solarwater heater. Arab J Sci Eng 2019;44:
2535–49.
[5] Zhang D, Li J, Gao Z, Wang L, Nan J. Thermal performance investigation of
modified flat plate solar collector with dual-function. Appl Therm Eng 2016;108:
1126–35.
[6] Gunjo DG, Mahanta P, Robi PS. Exergy and energy analysis of a novel type solar
collector under steady state condition: experimental and CFD analysis. Renew
Energy 2017;114:655–69.
[7] Wojcicki DJ. The application of the Typical Day Concept in flat plate solar collector
models. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;49:968–74.
[8] Zhang D, Tao H, Wang M, Sun Z, Jiang C. Numerical simulation investigation on
thermal performance of heat pipe flat-plate solar collector. Appl Therm Eng 2017;
118:113–26.
[9] Moss R, Shire S, Henshall P, Arya F, Eames P, Hyde T. Performance of evacuated
flat plate solar thermal collectors. Therm Sci Eng Progr 2018;8:296–306.
[10] Cerón JF, Pérez-García J, Solano JP, García A, Herrero-Martín R. A coupled
numerical model for tube-on-sheet flat-plate solar liquid collectors. Analysis and
validation of the heat transfer mechanisms. Appl Energy 2015;140:275–87.
[11] Babu MD, Ramanan MV. Experimental analysis on the performance of a solar flat
plate water heater with and without internal fins. Int J Ambient Energy 2017;38:
582–9.
[12] Sandhu G, Siddiqui K. Investigation of the fluid temperature field inside a flat-plate
solar collector. Heat Mass Transfer 2014;50:1499–514.
[13] Carmona M, Palacio M. Thermal modelling of a flat plate solar collector with latent
heat storage validated with experimental data in outdoor conditions. Sol Energy
2019;177:620–33.
[14] Wang N, Zeng S, Zhou M, Wang S. Numerical study of flat plate solar collector with
novel heat collecting components. Int Commun Heat Mass Transfer 2015;69:
18–22.
[15] Koholé YW, Fohagui FCV, Tchuen G. Flat-plate solar collector thermal performance
and optimal operation mode by exergy analysis and numerical simulation. Arab J
Sci Eng 2021;46(2):1877–97.
[16] Kumar S, Mullick SC. Wind heat transfer coefficient in solar collectors in outdoor
conditions. Sol Energy 2010;84(6):956–63.
[17] Hollands KGT, Unny TE, Raithby GD, Konicek L. Free convection heat transfer
across inclined air layers. Trans ASME J Heat Transf 1976;98:189–93.
[18] Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Solar engineering of thermal processes, 4rd edition, J.
Wiley; 2013.
Y. Wenceslas Koholé et al.
[19] Swinbank WC. Long-wave radiation from clear skies. Q J R Meteorolog Soc 1964;
90(386):488–93.
[20] Koholé YW, Tchuen G. Comparative study of three thermosyphon solar water
heaters made of flat-plate collectors with different absorber configurations. Int J
Sustain Energy 2017;36(5):430–49.
[21] Tchuen G, Koholé WY. A numerical investigation of three different thermosyphon
solar water heating systems. Int J Ambient Energy 2018;39(6):637–48.
[22] Çamdali Ü, Eri˙şen A, Çelen F. Energy and exergy analyses in a rotary burner with
pre-calcinations in cement production. Energy Convers Manage 2004;45(18-19):
3017–31.
[23] Kotas TJ. The exergy method of thermal plant analysis. Elsevier; 2013.
[24] Yazdanpanahi J, Sarhaddi F, Adeli MM. Experimental investigation of exergy
efficiency of a so111lar photovoltaic thermal (PVT) water collector based on
exergy losses. Sol Energy 2015;118:197–208.
14
Energy Conversion and Management: X 15 (2022) 100247
[25] Petela R. Engineering thermodynamics of thermal radiation: for solar power
utilization. New York: The McGraw -Hill Companies Inc; 2010.
[26] Petela R. Exergy of heat radiation. Trans ASME J Heat Trans 1964;2:187–92.
[27] Petela R. Exergy analysis of the solar cylindrical-parabolic cooker. Sol Energy
2005;79(3):221–33.
[28] Karakilcik M, Dincer I. Exergetic performance analysis of a solar pond. Int J Therm
Sci 2008;47:93–102.
[29] Dehghan AA, Movahedi A, Mazidi M. Experimental investigation of energy and
exergy performance of square and circular solar ponds. Sol Energy 2013;97:
273–84.
[30] Singh N, Kaushik SC, Misra RD. Exergetic analysis of a solar thermal power system.
Renew Energy 2000;19:135–43.